Question Details: I am a defendant in a Debt Collection case. When I was served, I provided a written response to the suit. A couple of months later, Plaintiff’s lawyer submitted a Motion for Summary Judgment. In my response to the Motion, I exposed several errors in the Plaintiff’s lawyer’s documentation, and explained how Plaintiff’s lawyer had violated my privacy rights in its effort to collect a debt. Last week Plaintiff’s lawyer filed a Motion for Hearing on the Motion for Summary Judgment. Isn’t the purpose of a Summary Judgment to eliminate the trial or hearing phase and have the court make a judgment based upon the evidence presented? Why would the Plaintiff’s lawyer want a hearing now? Does that mean that their case is in trouble? Should I respond to the Motion for Hearing and ask the court to deny the hearing? Thank you.
I am a lawyer in CT and practice in this area of the law. A hearing on the motion for summary judgment is where the lawyer is asking the court hear hear oral argument on his motion. he wants to have a judge listen to him in court go over why there is no dispute that you owe the money to his client based on the documents he is submitting. I suggest that you file an objection to the motion for summary judgment if you believe that there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding the money that is owed or the documentary evidence that is being offered by the plaintiff. if you can afford a lawyer, you should hire one to defend you. if a judgment enters, the plaintiff will be able to garnish your wages, lien your home, and take money from your bank account.

Are you a lawyer?
![]() |